Thereatened languages, for which RLS-efforts are
required in order to save them from erosion and ultimate extinction, are languages
that are not replacing themselves demographically. It means that they have fewer
and fewer users, generation after generation. Moreover, the uses to which these languages
are commonly put are not only few, but, additionally, they are typically unrelated
to higher social status (prestige, power) even within their own ethnocultural community.
This is a reflection of relative powerlessness of the bulk of their users.

RLS is an attempt on the part of authorities that
are recognized by the users and supporters of threatened languages to adopt policies
and to engage in efforts calculated to reverse the cumulative process of attrition.
RLS implies a social policy (either by the weak alone, on their own behalf, or, more
rarely, by the weak and the strong together), to interfere with and to disconfirm
the 'predictable course of events', because that course would result in consequences
that are consensualty viewed as undesirable.

RLS involves a prior value consensus among those
who advocate, formulate, implement and evaluate it. Without such prior consensus,
RLS policy itself may become a bone of contention even among its own advocates.

1. Much RLS can be implemented without compulsion.

2. 'Minority' rights need not interfere wih 'majority
rights'.

3. Bilingualism is a benefit for all, for Xmen (speakers
of the dominants language) alike.

4. RLS-efforts must vary according to problems faced
and opportunities encountered.